Raising Children Reduces More Than Just Your Salary: The Gap in Savings Creates a Difference in "Future Money"

The birth of a child changes the way you work. While monthly income decreases, new expenses such as diapers and clothing increase.

At such times, future savings often become the target for household budget adjustments. "Let's reduce it a bit now and restore it once we return to work." It's a natural decision to protect a sustainable lifestyle.

However, this temporary reduction can sometimes affect the amount of assets decades later.

A German estimate reported by BUSINESS-PANORAMA on October 24, 2026, quantified this subtle difference. According to a model calculation by the comparison site Verivox, reducing or stopping contributions to an ETF due to a work interruption after childbirth can result in a difference of about 222,000 euros in assets at the age of 67.

It's a significant amount, but it's important to note that this is neither a "mandatory loss for having children" nor a "cost incurred during parental leave." It's a comparison of future asset differences between continuing investments under certain conditions and interrupting them.

Under what conditions does the "222,000 euro difference" arise?

The estimate assumes a person who starts investing 300 euros monthly in an ETF from age 25 and continues until age 67. An ETF is an investment trust listed on a stock exchange.

The assumed annual return rate is 7.5%. If the investment is not interrupted, the assets at age 67 are expected to be about 991,000 euros.

The comparison is with a case where this person has a child at age 30 and takes a break from work for childcare.

For the first year, it is assumed that 65% of the usual income is supplemented by childcare benefits, and the contribution amount is reduced by 35%. The calculation reduces the monthly contribution from 300 euros to 195 euros.

The difference in principal accumulated over one year is 1,260 euros, calculated as 105 euros for 12 months. Even if the monthly contribution returns to 300 euros thereafter, the difference at age 67 is said to be about 17,700 euros.

In cases where the work break is longer, the model assumes benefits cease from the second year, and contributions stop. A three-year break results in an asset difference of about 108,000 euros, and a six-year break results in about 222,000 euros.

The six-year period here is an assumed work interruption period due to childcare. It cannot be directly replaced with Japan's childcare leave system or benefit period.

Not only the uninvested money but also the "increased time" changes

The core of this estimate is the effect of compound interest.

When profits from investments are reinvested, those profits become the basis for the next earnings. The longer the investment period, the more the accumulation of reinvested profits, beyond the initial money invested, influences the results.

In the six-year case, the total uninvested principal is 19,260 euros. In contrast, the asset difference at age 67 is about 222,000 euros.

The difference becomes significant because it calculates the hypothetical investment returns over the subsequent decades for money not invested in the early 30s.

Returning to work and restoring contributions has meaning. However, simply returning to the same monthly amount does not recover the past uninvested amounts or the investment period for those amounts.

In household finances during the childcare period, attention tends to focus on immediate income and expenses, but this estimate also draws attention to the differences that expand over time.

7.5% per year is not a guarantee—points to note when reading the figures

On the other hand, there is no need to be anxious just by looking at the number "up to 222,000 euros."

First, 7.5% per year is an assumed calculation. Real investments do not increase the same way every year, and there are years when prices fall. The results vary depending on when the contributions were interrupted and the subsequent market movements.

Also, the original article clearly states that taxes are not considered. The amount decades ahead may not have the same purchasing power as today due to inflation.

And the word "maximum" does not indicate an upper limit for all households. It is the figure for the case assuming a six-year work interruption among the models introduced in this article.

This estimate compares future balances in investment accounts. It does not evaluate the value of time spent with children, parental health, childcare environment, or individual family circumstances.

Therefore, concluding from this that "one should return to work early to protect contributions" is a leap. What should be understood is that the economic impact of taking leave includes aspects not visible in the monthly pay slip.

On social media, there are voices suggesting "the partner compensates for the contributions of the one doing childcare"

The relationship between childcare and asset formation is also a topic on overseas social media.

However, what is introduced here are not direct reactions to this article, but public posts about household finances and asset formation during parental leave. They are experiences and opinions of the posters, not representative survey results of society as a whole.

In the German-speaking Reddit parenting community, posts can be found about husbands contributing to their own ETF investments as a financial compensation during parental leave.

Another post explains that during a two-year childcare period, the husband bears most of the household expenses while the poster continues investing for retirement and saving for the child from benefits.

Additionally, in financial communities, there are consultations on how to compensate for reduced income and less preparation for retirement due to parental leave, which some feel is unfair.

What these have in common is that they are not just about "as long as this month's living expenses are covered." The discussion revolves around how to think about reducing future preparations when someone reduces their working hours for the family.

Whether households manage finances together or separately, this question remains. The rules for sharing living expenses and supporting long-term asset formation are not necessarily the same.

In Japan, first confirm the benefit system and "actual usable money"

When Japanese families use this as a reference, it's necessary to separate the German model from the Japanese system.

In Japan, childcare leave benefits are calculated based on 67% of pre-leave wages for the first 180 days, and 50% thereafter, if certain eligibility requirements are met. There is a cap on benefits, and the amount can change depending on wages paid during leave.

Furthermore, the post-birth leave support benefit, which started in April 2025, adds 13% for up to 28 days if both parents take at least 14 days of leave during a certain period after birth, under certain conditions.

Combined with existing benefits, the benefit rate is 80%, and when considering tax exemption and social insurance premium exemption, it is described as "equivalent to 100% take-home pay." However, it does not apply to the entire leave period, and attention is needed for eligibility and caps.

Considering these systems, a simple calculation of "income decreases by a certain percentage, so contributions decrease by the same percentage" does not capture the actual household finances.

What is needed is to line up expected benefits, timing of deposits, housing costs, daily living expenses, and post-birth expenses to see how the money on hand moves. Prioritizing investment continuation too much and lacking necessary cash in the short term would be counterproductive.

If discussing with a partner, separate "living expenses," "future funds," and "restart timing"

If using this estimate for family discussions, there are three themes to talk about.

The first is living expenses during leave. Which expenses are shared, and how to review the sharing when income changes. Continuing the burden based on pre-birth income ratios might lead to one party depleting their savings.

The second is each person's future funds.

Even if the household as a whole continues contributions, the assets of the working party might increase while the contributions of the childcare party stop. Checking not just the total amount but also what preparations each can have makes the discussion more concrete.

The third is the timing to review contributions.

"Restart when there's room" can lead to postponed decisions. If you decide in advance opportunities to review finances, such as after returning to work when childcare fees and working hours are known, it becomes easier to adjust according to the situation at that time.

The important thing is not to maintain the contribution amount at all costs. Whether reducing or stopping, the decision should not be solely borne by the person taking parental leave.

Don't let time for childcare become an individual's "asset gap"

This estimate should not be read as a means to judge childcare purely in terms of financial gain or loss.

Rather, what should be considered is why the impact of time spent for the family tends to concentrate on one person's income or investment account.

It is often because there is someone taking care of the children that the other can continue working. Considering that relationship, there is room to think about not only living expenses during leave but also future preparations as a family.

Temporarily pausing contributions is not a failure in household management. What is needed is not to blame the decision to pause but to have a support system that includes what comes next.

In addition to "how much can be received during parental leave," consider "how to protect the future funds of the person taking care of the children." This question should be added to pre-birth household discussions.

Sources and References

1. BUSINESS-PANORAMA/dts communication:
   Published on October 24, 2026. References the model estimate of ETF contributions by Verivox, assumptions of 300 euros per month and 7.5% annually, asset differences by leave period, and the point that taxes are not considered.
   https://business-panorama.de/news.php?newsid=6715757

2. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare "Q&A on Childcare Leave Benefits"
   Official materials to confirm the calculation method of Japan's childcare leave benefits, post-birth leave support benefits, benefit caps, and the concept of "equivalent to 100% take-home pay."
   https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/0000158500.htmlmhlw.go.jp

3. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare "Post-Birth Leave Support Benefit Simple Diagnosis (Eligibility Confirmation) Tool"
   Materials to confirm the principle that both parents take at least 14 days of leave, the 13% addition for up to 28 days, and exceptions not requiring spouse's leave.
   https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/syussyougo_kanishindan_00001.htmlmhlw.go.jp

4. Reddit・r/Eltern "Financial Compensation for Parental Leave?"
   Public posts about financial compensation during parental leave. Summarized posts about partner contributions to ETF investments and adjustments in sharing living expenses, as confirmed through searches. Not direct reactions to this news.
   https://www.reddit.com/r/Eltern/comments/1wj17xs/finanzieller_ausgleich_für_elternzeit/reddit.com

5. Reddit・r/Finanzen "Family Finances: Compensation for Partner During Parental Leave & Financial Management"
   Consultations on how to compensate for reduced income and less preparation for retirement due to parental leave between partners. Summarized content of posts confirmed through searches. Not direct reactions to this news.
   https://www.reddit.com/r/Finanzen/comments/nnsk3j/